masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Church of the Divine Plan
This appeared on the Cerberus News in the menu. JAF1970 20:34, March 20, 2010 (UTC) * BioWare states this is canon. :WHERE does BioWare state its canon. Other news articles have been deleted because they have no other source. This article has no other sources in the games, books, or comics and therefore should be deteted. Lancer1289 20:39, March 20, 2010 (UTC) ::This is the third time an article has been created from something in the news. The other two have been deleted because they should have been added to the asari and Mass Relay articles respectivly. They have now and this one can go anywhere because it has no bearing on the ME universe. Lancer1289 21:03, March 20, 2010 (UTC) :::This should not be deleted. Clearly they are news items for the Mass Effect universe created by Bioware. While they might not effect the game, they certainly effect the Mass Effect universe. Furthermore, the official Mass Effect 2 facebook page describes them as being "News items suitable to be heard walking around the Citadel."Bastian964 21:13, March 20, 2010 (UTC) :::Saying they're not canon is like describing the ingame news broadcasts as not canon.Bastian964 21:14, March 20, 2010 (UTC) ::::But saying they're like Citadel News Broadcasts also doesn't make them true (see Blasto) or particularly notable. SpartHawg948 21:17, March 20, 2010 (UTC) :::::First using facebook as a source is not exactly a good source for your argument. Second this article is irrelevent and should be deleted. The other two are in the process of being deleted and they should have been added to their respective articles. This is just another useless page about something that probably never be seen again. Nice about the canon by the way SpartHawg948, I never thought of that. Even if you take those into consideration, those can change based on if you import a game and the decisions made in said import.Lancer1289 21:19, March 20, 2010 (UTC) I don't have a problem if you think it should be deleted because it isn't notable. Deleting it because you don't think everything released by Bioware for the Mass Effect universe is canon is just trying to impose your "beliefs" about canon onto what actually is.Bastian964 21:31, March 20, 2010 (UTC) On the facebook as evidence issue. It is a way for Bioware to release news updates, discounting it as a source is like discounting official press releases by Bioware.Bastian964 21:34, March 20, 2010 (UTC) :I don't deny that the stuff we learn from the Cerberus Daily News is canon, but all the same, separate articles for holidays or fringe cults just aren't necessary. They're regurgitations of the original CDN statements as is, and so insignificant on their own that they're indistinguishable from trivia. Once in a blue moon we might get something that's arguably of much greater significance like the raloi, a topic which at least has a chance of being expanded upon in future games or books, but things like Janiris, Dark Switches, or the Church of the Divine Plan are really the bottom of the barrel when it comes to notability. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:32, March 20, 2010 (UTC) :To add an aritcle for everything that comes out on CDN is just a wast of space. Most of the stuff that coems out should be added to the articles. Second I NEVER imposed my beliefs on what is cannon. I have enough common sense to see that it is from BioWare but if we put up an article for everything then this wiki will get very large, very quickly. As to my canon comments I know what I said and I retract it because after seeing and participating in two other discussions on the same topic I know I was frusterated. I'll be amending my comments on the CDN talk page as soon as I'm done here. I know that it is canon and I was stupid for making my first comment. At the time I was frusterated, and while no excuse, I just want to see these articles stop, and for people to have some common sense when creating articles, but that is a topic for another day. Lancer1289 00:39, March 21, 2010 (UTC) I'm not against deleting it if people feel it isn't notable (see my comment above Commdor's). I'm against it because the delete tag claims because it being from Cerberus Daily News thus not notable (as opposed to notable on a case by case basis) along with the fact that Lancer was claiming it was non-canon. As soon as the delete tag changes, since Lancer has already retracted his statements, I will no longer be opposed to it. On the topic of Lancer, you should simply post that you retract your statement. Changing your statement to make you sound better without any kind of notice saying it has been changed is not cool.Bastian964 02:07, March 21, 2010 (UTC)